6.5 Grendel vs. the .308

[dvdcrr]

The 6.5 Grendel is more along the lines of a 7mm Waters than a full powered 308. The 308 holds the advantage in terms of energy and lethal range. But the AR-10 rifles are heavy when compared to the older Garand style action and I much prefer the 22" barrel M14.

Not to step on any toes, the 6.5 cartridge is fine and I'm sure it would be similar to my 6.8 which I like.

 

[COSteve]

6.8 SPC vs 6.5 Grendel - will the arguments ever end??

Whichever you like, 6.8 or 6.5, it's going to be a lighter package than an AR 10 sized .308, however, if you don't need all of that junk on it, a nice wood stocked Springfield M1A is an option. The OP needs to decide what HE wants based on HIS criteria and HIS priorities. We can argue all year about the benefits and shortcomings of everything and not settle a darned thing.

 

[tirod]

Bill Alexander sells the 6.5G, I don't consider him guilty of anything more than marketing his round to the largest possible choice of consumer.

That doesn't mean the 6.5G ballistics actually fit what's needed. The 6.5PPC was a paper shooter round, the 6.5G earned it's rep as a paper shooter round, and then - after all the work to make it a long range precision paper shooter round, AA sees the writing on the wall and starts marketing it to the American hunter.

Where's the ads in Guns and Ammo with dead elk at 500m published 5 years ago when he had the chance? It's only been lately Bill woke up and realized he'd been missing out on the money. Has 6.5G been made SAMMI now, yes, which basically means it's up for grabs, anyone can build it to spec, but the money isn't going to AA. The financial reality is he's giving it away because he can't make a bunch of money on it, it's no longer exclusive. Either keep credit in the history books for it, or be blamed for riding it into the ground.

Doesn't change the ballistics at all, which are superlative at distance - well beyond the typical hunting ranges of the most popular game. It's not a whitetail cartridge, just being marketed as one now, and the turnaround of emphasis from long range to Joe Bubba carbine ammo is almost laughable.

The OP didn't post up about some other alternative cartridge, it's about 6.5G vs .308, and in that specific faceoff, even I would choose 6.5G. That doesn't make it the optimum all around gamegetter in America, tho, it lacks the power for dangerous game, and it's not optimum out of a 16" barrel any more than the .22-250. If that short fat case and long bullet do have greater carrying power, it takes a longer barrel to give the bullet more time to absorb energy from the slower burning powder to be able to fly over 400m to deliver it. High BC means Long Distance is REQUIRED in order to have the superior efficient shape demonstrate energy saving to deliver.

It doesn't do anything better at whitetail ranges, so if a cartridge is chosen specifically for that, it's not at the top of the list. Shoot prairie dogs with it, and the G excels where the .308 would be punishing. Shoot dangerous game with it, and you'd better be really good - your guide is still going to have something much bigger to back you up. HE'S not carrying a 6.5G, no sirree, but after all, he's marketing his Great White Hunter services, nobody spends coin on bumpfiring with Joe Bubba for major game.

I'm not arguing about that other cartridge, I'm simply pointing out I haven't drank the AA koolaid. The 6.5g isn't a major step forward in much at all, especially for deer hunting since it's range ability is actually excessive. It trades off power for BC further down range where most hunters won't need it, and that, along with it's documented ancestry as a paper puncher is exactly why people ask questions about it's ability on live game. I didn't ask the question, but it DOES come up, the market out there isn't totally convinced it's so hot after all. And most of them chose something else besides it or .308, 6.5G is still treading water trying to keep alive.

 

[JASmith]

...It's not a whitetail cartridge...

The 6.5 Grendel is in the class of .257 Roberts, 30-30 Winchester and outshines the 6.8 SPC in killing potential. It also beats the 100 gr CoreLokt load for the .243 Winchester at all ranges. The only cartridge in this lineup that satisfies the Hornady HITS criteria beyond 600 yards is the Grendel. The others lose out a couple of hundred yards closer in.

Interestingly, the 30-30 has better killing potential at longer ranges than the .243 Win, but the rainbow trajectory makings hitting more of a challenge.

All this on an AR frame.

See http://shootersnotes.com/grendelmania/grendel-potential-for-large-game/ for a more detailed discussion.

 

[ZX10Aviator]

I just completed and fired my first AR, and it is a 6.5 Grendel. Im very happy with it, initially I wanted an AR10, I went away from that tot he AR15 due to weight, then I was looking at the 6.8, but the ballistics of the Grendel is what got me, I only plan to shoot things <300yds, but maybe I want to lob some farther someday, dont want to be limited. 6.5G accuracy was another amazing thing, the BC of the bullet, etc.. Pretty awesome round and Im very happy I went that route. It was a little more than I was initially wanting to spend, but worth it.

 

[5RWill]

The 6.5 Grendel is in the class of .257 Roberts, 30-30 Winchester and outshines the 6.8 SPC in killing potential. It also beats the 100 gr CoreLokt load for the .243 Winchester at all ranges. The only cartridge in this lineup that satisfies the Hornady HITS criteria beyond 600 yards is the Grendel. The others lose out a couple of hundred yards closer in.

Interestingly, the 30-30 has better killing potential at longer ranges than the .243 Win, but the rainbow trajectory makings hitting more of a challenge.

All this on an AR frame.

See http://shootersnotes.com/grendelmani...or-large-game/ for a more detailed discussion.

You've handicapped the .243 by running a corelokt. A .243 running a 105gr hunting VLD @ 3100fps bullet absolutely stomps all the cartridges listed above including the grendel at every range past 200yds, even if you managed to get the 100gr 6.5 bullet at 3000fps. The grendel doesn't hold a candle to a .243 for long range or energy downrange. Where do you get that a 30-30 has better killing potential at long range? Even if a .30-30 were capable of launching a 175gr bullet at 2600fps the .243 still retains more velocity and energy downrange.

 

[tirod]

outshines the 6.8 SPC in killing potential.

It's not about whether it can do that. Since the 6.8 does outsell the 6.5G in products offered on the market, including ammo, I'll pass on this as nothing more than the typical koolaid delirium. Hunters are voting with dollars, not internet postings.

I didn't bring the 6.8 into the conversation. Most of it was shoved in because some apparently think it's the target of the VS. comparison anytime 6.5G is mentioned. That's their problem. Overcompensating for something?

As proposed by the OP 6.5G vs .308, if I was hunting, I'd pick 6.5G. You get the AR15 platform, lighter weight, less recoil, and handier size. Those are all advantages over an AR10, so much so it was only adopted by a few small countries. The AR15 is in service with 65, over 9 million have been made, and you can order parts from a dozen vendors and they all work together.

I've hunted with .308 in a HK91 for twenty years, it's not that much fun. Had 6.8 never been invented, I'd be shooting 6.5G. It's clearly superior to 5.56 on medium live game, simply because it has a better fit to the actual working conditions. We don't shoot deer out to 800m, nor do we need more than 1000 foot pounds. Something that delivers that out to 350m will do it most of the time, and that's a small percentage situation.

There's no problem with the 6.5G in and of itself, what I find amusing to poke hole in is all the overblown statements and exaggeration of the 6.5G fans. They can't and won't just accept it for what it is. For some reason, it has to be better that XX cartridge every time.

A 123 gr bullet with 30gn of powder can't violate the laws of physics, it does just fine, but it's not the best answer for everything. That's why other cartridges exist. Pinning one's ego entirely on one cartridge isn't mature.

 

[JASmith]

Blackops_2,

The first point is that the .243 and 30-30 are classic cartridges. The comoparisons were made in that spirit using what appears to be the most popu;ar factory loads.

The second point is that the game potential uses the Hornady HITS methpdology.

Choosing a hot handload with bullets not normally available in factory ammunition distorts the comparison. The closest to the load you describe is the 95 gr Hornady SuperFormance. Using this load for comparison would further substantiate th e conclusions.

Bottom line -- the Grendel is an AR-15 cartridge that has serious medium game potential and is showing that in actual field performance.

 

[5RWill]

I agree, i was just pointing it out. Who actually buys a grendel and pays 40$ for 50rds. Whoever has more money than me. Most people reload that shoot any cartridge comparable to what the grendel was (a wildcat). Sorry for not considering the comparison at hand was on factory ammo. The only factory ammo i buy is for my AR.

That's also not overly hot load a 115gr DTAC can easily achieve 3000+ in a 26"-28" setup. Part of the .243's downfall is mainly having to run it in a long setup to utilize the capability. That being said i get 2700fps with a 105gr VLD on a 18" rig.

 

[Grendel65]

Tirod has serious issues when it comes to historical facts. He is, from all reading here and in other forums, historically challenged.

He is correct that the 6.5 PPC was a target cartridge. However, he equates the 6.5 PPC to the Grendel, apparently.

He says, "The 6.5PPC was a paper shooter round, the 6.5G earned it's rep as a paper shooter round, and then - after all the work to make it a long range precision paper shooter round, AA sees the writing on the wall and starts marketing it to the American hunter."

Please demonstrate who has used the 6.5 Grendel as a paper shooter round in competition.

Bill Alexanders stated purpose, way back 7+ years ago, was to develop a round that would be an effective deer cartridge in the AR15. The market for a deer cartridge was huge compared to the market for a target rifle, where there really is no class for an AR15 based Grendel, anyways!

The 6.8, however, was developed not as a hunting round, but as a combat round. The military at large found that it did not offer a substantial enough improvement over the 5.56 to make the switch, so it never happened. (They felt the same way about the Grendel, although its intent was never as a military round. Bill Alexander worked in military arms prior to founding Alexander Arms, and knew that row
was way to tough to hoe!)

However, its easier to point at the Grendel fans and call them CoolAid drinkers than it is to actually accept that with the right bullets there is nothing the 6.8 does that the 6.5 won't do, but there is plenty the 6.8 can't do that the 6.5 DOES!

Inside 400 yards they are both effective, but from 400 yards out, the Grendel factory loads walk away from any performance with any factory 6.8 load. Thats all that you can reasonably compare, factory vs factory, because hand loads will never be used by most shooters.

Those are the facts, as Tirod likes to proclaim.

 

[Shane Tuttle]

I better step in and shut this one down. Obviously stated several times over yet some not getting the hint, this has gone far away in Off-Topic-Land.

Besides, better me than Art having to read through all of this and having a conniption fit.